masseffectfandomcom-20200222-history
User talk:Commdor
Welcome to my talk page. Feel free to leave a message. Please sign all posts with four tildes (~').' ---- __TOC__ Mass Effect: Genesis Post Please don't post incorrect information saying it will come out to 360 and pc. The link isn't of valid source a maybe you need to look up real valid links and not fake ones. --EnemyD v2 00:22, February 15, 2011 (UTC) Wiki is all about posting facts not false rumors The link provided is not a confirmed source and neither is any site claiming the same, unless if it's Bioware or EA confirming it all others site claiming this information is false. EDIT--Note: "Please do not add speculation to Mass Effect 3 articles. The wiki only accepts facts, and speculation will be deleted. At most, link us to forum discussions rather than posting it here." This was a quote from Lancer and in the matter of genesis going to 360 and pc is considered speculation not fact, the source provided is not valid Bioware and EA confirmed it as a PS3 exclusive, it wouldn't make sense in a marketing stand point to release it to those platforms considering mass effect 1 is on 360 and pc, this is just a wild rumor created by pc and 360 fanboys, it's no wonder wikia pages get dissed for having lack of real information. --EnemyD v2 00:34, February 15, 2011 (UTC)(Talk) :We have no information stating that Genesis will NOT be released on the PC and 360 from a source with equal or greater credibility than the one cited. --Swooshy 00:57, February 15, 2011 (UTC) That's all well and good, but arguing with me isn't going to achieve anything. You and I don't have the final say on the matter. If you want to remove the source, bring it up on the article's talk page and community can decide whether it stays or goes. -- Commdor (Talk) 02:48, February 15, 2011 (UTC) :Just saying what does that note have to do with Genesis? It is a note that we won't tolerate speculation on ME3 articles, and unless I'm mistaken, Genesis has to do with ME2, not ME3. The source is valid and unless you have something to contradict that, it stays. Also when did I say that? IIRC I added it to the article to keep speculation down as it was up on the ME2 page before it was released as well so it seemed appropriate. So I fail to see how that is quoting me when it is site policy. Lancer1289 02:52, February 15, 2011 (UTC) And I think you don't know jack shit, it's people like you that make wikia a non-reliable source within itself. --EnemyD v2 04:34, February 15, 2011 (UTC)EnemyD v2 :It's not wise to say that to an admin. --Swooshy 04:40, February 15, 2011 (UTC) Your an admin wow an admin who fails at his info. --EnemyD v2 04:45, February 15, 2011 (UTC)EnemyD v2 :(edit confclit)Already notified the user of the breach of the language policy, but seriously that was completely uncalled for and the petty jab was unnecessary also. I also missed the "fanboys" comment earlier which was also unnecessary. I do know a thing or two about what goes on here, and Commdor has already provided you with the proper way of doing things. Currently I see no reason to take down the source because we have nothing to contradict it or say something differently. Things can come from outside sources and if they are deemed reliable source and reliable information, then we can use it. That is the way things have been done, and the way they will probably keep on working. Lancer1289 04:47, February 15, 2011 (UTC) :And he's not the admin, I am. Lancer1289 04:47, February 15, 2011 (UTC) No duh who do you think im talking to, will ferrel, no brain --EnemyD v2 04:53, February 15, 2011 (UTC)EnemyD v2 :You do know there isn't need for comments like that. Is it so hard to have a mature conversation about something without resorting to name calling, inappropriate language, and petty jabs? Lancer1289 04:57, February 15, 2011 (UTC) "This may (or may not) help clarify things: Jesse Houston, the Producer for ME2 on PS3, posted on the BioWare forums concerning what will be included in ME2. He stated, regarding Genesis, that "This interactive comic's initial release will be exclusive to PS3 owners" (emphasis added). Now, if Genesis were truly only going to be released for PS3, and not for the 360 or PC, why would Houston feel the need to specify that the initial release would be PS3 exclusive? He could have just said "This interactive comic will be exclusive to PS3 owners." But he didn't. I'm not saying it's definitive proof, but unlike the BeefJack article, it does have the benefit of coming from an approved and easily verifiable source. And while you may be willing to take EA's word over that of Electronic Theatre, I'll take BioWare over EA any day." Quoted by SpartHawg948 --EnemyD v2 05:04, February 15, 2011 (UTC)EnemyD v2 :And this serves what purpose exactly because, and I'm being serious, it is lost on me? You only just strengthened our argument for keeping it and weakened yours for removing it. Spart is quoting Jesse Houston saying that Genesis will be initially exclusive to the PS3. So it looks like your comment about "this is just a wild rumor" is demonstratably false. Lancer1289 05:17, February 15, 2011 (UTC) Morality Guide (Mass Effect 2) - Dossier: The Convict I noticed that you removed the information about the first conversation with Jack during the Dossier: The Convict mission from the Morality Guide (Mass Effect 2) site. While I can see that the way it was written might not been ideal, I think at least some kind of information about the conversation with Jack resulting in Paragon and Renegade points should remain, don't you think? --M.harmless 03:24, February 20, 2011 (UTC) :If the addition of such info is under discussion, then no. You'll have to wait for the discussion to conclude and the community to approve the action before you can add the info. If the info you want to add is pure speculation or unverifiable, then you can't add it at all. And whatever the state of the info you want to add, linking any talk page in an article's content is strongly discouraged; linking to a talk page discussion implies it is reliable and equivalent to a valid source, but they are not acceptable as sources. -- Commdor (Talk) 04:00, February 20, 2011 (UTC) ::Thanks for the reply. I understand your concerns. Regarding the matter in question, what can be proven as a fact is that the conversation results in the gain of morality points (by comparing the paragon/renegade values before and after it with the save game editor or by looking at the in-game bars on the squad screen). ::So would it be in line with the wiki's conventions to add the following information: "Morality points will be awarded during this conversation, although the exact values are currently unknown."? This would not include any speculation and would increase the information value of the page IMO (since the guide implies that all conversations that are not listed don't have paragon/renagade point awards). --M.harmless 23:45, February 20, 2011 (UTC) :::Yep, that should be acceptable. -- Commdor (Talk) 23:49, February 20, 2011 (UTC) ::::Um the problem I have with that is that something like that isn't present in the guide, and after looking through the history, we need point values to go into the guide. Just saying that points are awarded don't seem to be good enough based on the history of the Morality Guides. Actual point values, and the dialogue options are needed to point to specific point values and specific dialogue choices. If you want to work it out first, then feel free. However just putting a note there just doesn't sit well with me, or based on the history. Lancer1289 00:01, February 21, 2011 (UTC)